Why the Waffen-SS

[Rob - wssob2]

Interesting comment from Adrian Weale about the fascination of the Waffen-SS in his book Army of Evil p.xi :

“…The reason I wanted to write about the SS…was because there seemed to be an increasing disconnection between what the organization actually was and how it is often portrayed, more than sixty years since it was dissolved. A generation of casual readers of military history is likely to believe that the Holocaust was perpetrated by a gang of psychopathic sadists, while the Waffen-SS was an elite force of military supermen whose reputation has been tainted simply because of the uniform they wore.”

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi RJ55,

Sorry if I misinterpreted your position.

Regarding casualties: It is sometimes asserted that the W-SS endured proportionally higher casualties than the Army and that this was somehow to their credit.

In the widest sense, this is true. However, the Army provided all the W-SS's rear echelon. Once one looks at just the casualties of the combat elements of the W-SS and the Army, there is little or no demonstrable difference.

In fact, the Army's Grossdeutschland Division suffered higher proportional losses than the most hit W-SS division - the Totenkopf.

In haste,

Sid.

[BillHermann]

One could also stress higher casualties is also not a sigh of "elite" maybe fanatical and or inexperienced but not elite. Many so called elite units have fewer casualties due to smarter actions on the battlefield.

[anondragon2012]

I may have missed this.. I have searched for it but I have not found a thread asking, discussing or debating this subject. My question is, why are so many infatuated with the WaffeN-SS and not just a simple interest, or a study from a historical perspective but a real drive to assume and create a false mystique over something that is simple in fact and in recorded history, something that is really obvious. Why do some of us have to manipulate history to serve our own personal agenda and create fictional dreams to protect and honor something like the Waffen-SS

(...)
Regards Bill

I've never understood the American fascination with the Third Reich in general.
I'll be honest, I find it most of the time childish and full of stereotypes.

However from a European Nationalist point of view, the fascination with the W-SS and Third Reich is immediately understandable. After all, if the Third Reich had won, most problems which bother Nationalists would be solved, and Third Reich ideology addresses all the Nationalist questions (Race, religion, role of women, role of state, and so on).

W-SS being basically the archetype of the fighter who fights for a lost cause without gaining anything from it but death. I fully understand why these guys are admired especially for EU nationalists.

In the current world of consumerism and decadence, to see some hard guys who were willing to put their lives on the line for purely ideological, not monetary gains, is incredible.

When you think about it today, it seems crazy, incredible.
I will be honest, I think regardless of political convictions, there is something about the average German mentality even after 1945 (the greatest generation in USA), that can be admired and which I personally admire: Discipline, hard work, humility, care of body hygiene and intellect, love of culture vs. consumerism. Which is why Germans have rebuilt their country so quick after WW2.

Kind regards

[Harro]

After all, if the Third Reich had won, most problems which bother Nationalists would be solved, and Third Reich ideology addresses all the Nationalist questions (Race, religion, role of women, role of state, and so on).

Nationalists in general tend to cherish their independence, that's basically what makes them nationalists in the first place. I doubt they liked the way the Third Reich dealt with that

[BillHermann]

The regime itself really shouldn't be admired due to victories much as the early sucess was more to do with politics, apathy and economies with the european and global comunities than anything else. Further there should not be much to admire in this regimes higher echelon due to the bickering, drama and infighting, one could say that it could be humorous if it wasn't for the tragedy.

Many may not agree with the above but there is more than enough evidence to support this. However I won't go much further as is would be off topic.

[anondragon2012]

After all, if the Third Reich had won, most problems which bother Nationalists would be solved, and Third Reich ideology addresses all the Nationalist questions (Race, religion, role of women, role of state, and so on).

Nationalists in general tend to cherish their independence, that's basically what makes them nationalists in the first place. I doubt they liked the way the Third Reich dealt with that

Well, that might be true today.
But in the context of WW2 history it shows that Pan-European Nationalism and European Nationalist cooperation was as a popular idea as was communist/socialist internaitonal cooperation.

You have to remember that after the Fall of France, the Third Reich effectively managed continental Europe.
Within this Europe, most nationalist factions active before the war in various European countries added themselves to the Fascist cause, especially when Germany decided to invade the USSR and portrayed its fight as a European fight against Bolschevism. This Pan-European crusade appealed to many European Nationalists, you just have to see the incredible amount of fascist factions popping up completely independently of German actions in various European countries, and even outright ad-hoc W-SS formations.

You can see in most of these movements, I have in mind REX in Belgium, French fascism, Scandinavian nationalists, etc...These were all nationalist chauvinist movements which had nothing to do with Germany and even despised the Feldgrau (most of these guys having fought the Prussians in WW1).

But when they saw that:
1. Germany was winning on every front.
2. Fascism was on the rise. It was the idea of the day.
3. Bolschevism/Communism was obviously on the rise in the east and Nationalists had seen what Russians had done to their Nationalists/Monarchists in the revolution.

Alot of Nationalist leaders put themselves on the side of Germany because they saw the big geopolitical picture of the time.

Unfortunately for them, this was a completely wrong assessment and the death of Germany took with them their multiple allies.

Sorry for going off-tangent, this subject fascinates me. I think Europe will be forever marked by this war and its consequences. It will be interesting to see the future for us, especially as immigration increases.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi anondragon,

You write, "Pan-European Nationalism and European Nationalist cooperation was as a popular idea as was communist/socialist internaitonal cooperation."

There was no such thing as "Pan-European Nationalism". It is a contradiction in terms. This was a Nazi propaganda theme created from 1942 onwards, once German nationalism had failed to triumph on its own - hence the supposed "Pan-European Crusade against Judaeo-Bolshevism".

"European Nationalist cooperation" certainly existed within the Axis, but nationalism is exclusive, not inclusive. Almost every Axis country that had a mutual border had a nationalist gripe with its neighbour over where the line was drawn. "European Nationalist cooperation" was a short term, pragmatic fix within the Axis, not a mutually agreed ideological movement.

Cheers,

Sid

[BillHermann]

Indeed, and back to the Waffen-SS the foreigners that joined were far less interested in German nationalism to them it was more about the ideals of the SS, the fear of communism which was being partially pushed on them by the nazis and it was an institution that held a level of appeal to conservatives and traditionalists. It was grabbing the superficial emotions of the better days.

Even the nazis did not look at these foreigners in the same way as their own. They were a necessity to support the war effort.

Only some contemporary views have turned the Waffen-SS into a histirical pan European nationalist glorious organization. Indeed from a nazi propaganda view it could be siad but that's where it ends.

When recruiting for soldiers you do what you can to sell. That is why the SS used foreign national symbols when recruiting in other regions. This was to push the ideals of the SS but in the flavour of the country being recruited .

[dobromeister]

[Moved from "main difference between heer and W-SS?"]

Indeed, the mere act of voluntarily joining the SS at that stage was a sign of conformity with its ethos, party card or not.

It was enough if you were simply anti-Communist, anti-Stalinist or anti-Semitic, and preferably fervently (especially as regards the first two). Your calling card was your willingness to fight.

[BillHermann]

Well with your last 3 to 4 posts we know your answer to the why question.

[Kroener17]

Gentlemen - in case you don't know we have a distinguished forum member who is a former SS Soldier.

Now, back to our regular programming.

If I may ask, which member is this? From which division?

[BillHermann]

this always happens, the starry eyes come out with a hint that there may be a former SS member hanging about. Yes there are some, some have come and gone. They are people like you and me. I just wish all veterans had this level of appreciation but some how the SS get the most attention.

[dobromeister]

this always happens, the starry eyes come out with a hint that there may be a former SS member hanging about. Yes there are some, some have come and gone. They are people like you and me. I just wish all veterans had this level of appreciation but some how the SS get the most attention.

Oh that's a classic, "they are people like you and me." Well being human beings, and in that regard alone, I suppose you are correct. They get up in the morning and put their trousers on like you do. But that's about where the similarities end. The Waffen-SS were battle hardened in the kind of daily combat you could only fantasize about. Who are you kidding here, other than yourself? Good lord.

Canadian warriors ruled Dieppe, didn't they? That says enough.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Drobmeister,

The Waffen-SS were no more "battle hardened in..... daily combat" than equivalent Army formations and no more likely to put their lives at risk. Indeed, until the end of 1944, the average W-SS man was marginally more likely to become a casualty against the Western Allies than an Army man, while an Army man was marginally more likely to become a casualty in the East against the Nazis' primary ideological foe than a W-SS man was!

There is no type of military-historical information available from W-SS veterans that is not available in far greater number from German Army veterans. Veterans of all sorts are only unique in their personal experience, which was necessarily very narrow. For example, a W-SS veteran's opinion on Stalingrad would be of limited value because all the senior, Reich-raised W-SS divisions were then sunning themselves while reforming in occupied France! On the other hand, he might be quite informative on French wine, women and cuisine of the time.

Cheers,

Sid.